Are You Watching the Secret ACTA Debacle?

Are you a business owner? An executive manager? Are you at all concerned about external controls over your business technologies? Does it bother you that your children have become easy audit targets for copyright compliance sharp practices?

Well, here's yet another threat to your so-called "peaceful use" options for literally any technology that can be covered under copyright laws. Even the European Parliament is threatening the European Union with legal action if the drafting group doesn't quit hiding details to the agreement.

Yet another draconian copyright law... Written in secret so the consumers won't understand until it's too late. Wonder what they're working so very hard to hide?

The ultra-secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is multinational in scope and continues to cruise under the radar of virtually everyone except a select number of copyright holder representatives.

As usual, this one is being instigated by the same folks who gave us the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the No Electronic Theft Act (NETAct), the Super Digital Millennium Copyright Acts (SDMCA), and who did their best to shove the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) down our collective throats.

As I continue to suggest:

"If you don't wake up and become clearly aware of copyright reform activities, you will soon find out that what is being done isn't being done FOR you, it's being done TO you!"

And, yes, you should be pulling that blanket up over your eyes.

Update ACTA... More resources you need to read!

If you haven't followed up on my suggestion to look into the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, here are several more links to perspectives you might want to consider. This thing is well out of hand and only through clear and effective public demands will the onerous terms of ACTA be avoided.

Excellent materials on the We Rebuild web site.

Free Software Foundation link on the Linux.com site HERE.

ComputerWorld, New Zealand HERE.

Great Statement by Mark Harris on ACTA Lemming-Brothers HERE

As I have said since the first attempts to pass DMCA and UCITA: "If we do not start monitoring what is being done in terms of special interest lobbying, we are ALL going to discover too late that what is being done is being done to us."

Once these laws, acts, regulations, and agreements are passed, they will be impossible to counter.

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) – DMCA & UCITA on steroids?

You say that you're too busy to follow pending legislation? Understandable. You were probably busy while the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) were under consideration, too. Yet... Both of these - as well as ACTA - have direct and serious implications for you and your business.

Well, just in case you are bored (or if you are at all concerned about your future access to the Internet) you may want to take at least a surface look at the latest attempt to establish more draconian oversight on the parts of the digital content providers. It's called the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and this one represents the absolute cutting edge in “stealth legislation.”

Quick Discussion?

• First, we'll take a very quick view of how easily stealth legislation comes into being.
• Next, we'll discuss UCITA, a basic example of stealth legislation in action.
• You'll also want to take a close look at the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This second example of stealth legislation was more successfully accomplished by the special interest groups.
• Then, just so you aren't left hanging, we'll show how the example legislation will impact your business – AND how you can stonewall its influence.
• Finally, we'll take a very quick look at the latest stealth attempt and provide links you can follow to review further information.
  

Stealth Legislation!

• Occurs when special interest groups (and their lobbying groups) gain dominant access to willing political figures,
• The special interest groups “help assemble” legislative proposals that favor their interests,
• Actually “help” is a relatively benign word for an environment in which, sometimes, the special interest groups actually draft the proposed legislation,
• Once crafted, the legislation is either grafted on to another, less controversial, document, or it is quietly passed (usually late on a weekday evening) when the C-Span cameras (and public scrutiny) are focused elsewhere,
• The real key – an issue that should chill you to the absolute bone – is that these legislative acts are conducted very silently behind the scenes without the benefit of public oversight.
• You wake up one morning and discover that you are legally bound by a law you've never heard of.

Example of Stealth Legislation

Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA)

• UCITA started out as a modification to the United States Code,
• The committee responsible for updating the Code refused to include the UCITA segment after closely reviewing both the document AND the process by which it was assembled,
• As far as content, UCITA would have made an enormous number of content provider sharp practices 100% legal,
• The “rights” of the technology consumer were simply not covered within UCITA in any manner,
• Link HERE for a quick review of the UCITA sharp practices.
• As to the manner in which the detailed language of UCITA came about, one witness reported that, during any session in which the public was invited to attend the review, the number of content industry lawyers & lobbyists in the speaking line outnumbered the public by 60 to 1.
• When the review committee refused to include the UCITA content in the updated U.S. Code, the digital content providers & their friends immediately began a focused effort to get the regulation passed at the individual state levels.
• UCITA was passed and is currently part of state law in Maryland & Virginia.
• When word of UCITA content finally leaked to the public, the groundswell of local opposition grew so rapidly that many states considered the UCITA regulation onerous enough to pass Anti-UCITA legislation.

How will UCITA get to you?

• Every significant contract and/or license includes a clause titled “Governing Law.”
• To counteract your rights under UCITA, the content provider simply cites Maryland or Virginia as the State of Governing Law.
• If your state does not have an Anti UCITA Law in effect, your relationship with that provider will be governed by UCITA. (For the moment, we'll assume your state does not have a legal UCITA barrier.)
• The only way to effectively counteract the UCITA threat is to read every technology-related agreement (Yes, licenses, too!) and strike out any attempt to make Maryland or Virginia the state of governing law.
• If your provider is attempting to insert this venue into its licenses you can be very certain that the supplier is aware of its powers under UCITA and intends to take advantage of those powers in your relationship.

Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)
As stealth legislation, ACTA is building an entirely new methodology. This time around, instead of appealing to individual legislators, the special interest groups have managed to serve their uniquely brewed fruit punch to the executive leadership of multiple countries.

The result? In its incarnation as a “Trade Agreement” ACTA does not have to be approved – or even reviewed – by elected legislators. There exists virtually no oversight in terms of content, focus, or legality. As an agreement between national leadership, ACTA becomes a sort of binding international regulation by default.

In keeping with its stealth legacy, ACTA has been maintained as a carefully guarded secret from the public. Unbelievable as it seems, in the United States, details of this agreement are being hidden behind a secrets of “National Security” blanket. Attempts to gain access to working documents under the Freedom of Information Act have been routinely met with refusals citing National Security. The U.S. Trade Office, which seems to be spearheading the agreement.

Even more chilling are the number of digital rights group representative who HAVE had access to the language of the agreement. As with DMCA, it appears that the majority of input is being delivered by digital content special interest groups – versus consumer rights advocates. Reading between the lines should bring to mind the intense efforts of the software, music, and motion picture groups in their efforts to gain more control over access, distribution, and use of related products.

For a list of private sector individuals who have gained access follow this LINK to the Knowledge Ecology International web site. These folks appear to have the most comprehensive review.

I'd love to tell you more about this interesting little load of nitro but, frankly, there just isn't any clear information to go on. So, instead, my goal is to just get you moving forward toward other web sites – many of which focus on tracking these types of activities. So, here's a list of links to check out:

Wired Magazine – Always one of my favorite sources.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/12/feds-fear-acta-scrutiny/

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/03/obama-declares/

Electronic Frontier Foundation – Another great resource.

http://www.eff.org/search?text=ACTA

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-three-strikes-and-

Public Knowledge -

http://www.publicknowledge.org/issues/acta

Virtual Review -

http://virtualreview.org/tech/zoom/1298179/report-us-fears-public-scrutiny-would-scuttle-acta

U.S. Trade Representative -

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/factsheets/2009/asset_upload_file917_15546.pdf

European Commission -

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/creating-opportunities/trade-topics/intellectual-property/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/creating-opportunities/trade-topics/intellectual-property/anti-counterfeiting/

UCITA Links – Be careful with some of these. Some were (are) developed by fruit punch salesmen for public consumption. Review multiple perspectives before you take action.

Software Asset Management Services, Inc. - Good info and more links to UCITA – I can say that because I wrote them...

http://www.samsrv.com/ucita.htm

Americans for Fair Electronic Commerce Transactions (AFFECT) – Good resource.

http://www.ucita.com/what_problems.html

Bad Software – Interesting perspectives

http://www.badsoftware.com/uccindex.htm

The “party line”

http://www.ucitaonline.com/

New to technology asset management? Want to succeed? Here are some things to consider.

Technology asset management - software asset management - It's all about putting a stop to status quo - putting a stop to "This is the way it's done...". If you are a "go along with the program" kind of person, you may get the job but you probably won't get the results. If, on the other hand, you are a "cut the the core" kind of individual, you probably have the capabilities to get the results but you probably won't get the chance to do the job.

Interesting quandary? Been there. Done that.

So here's my challenge to you: If you are willing to step up to the plate and change the asset management world, I'll help you all I can. How will you know if joining forces with "The Network!" and "The Institute!" would be right for you? Measure against your honest responses to the following items - don't present your corporate face - present your OWN. Answer as a buyer and use the word "Agree" for "I accept" or use the word "Disagree" for "I'll be taking this acquisition to your competitor" (I'll interpret your score when you have finished...)

1. This software contract is not negotiable...

2. The hardware agreement is not negotiable...

3. The provider reserves the right to change the agreement at will and without notice...

4. This product is sold "as is"...

5. You can only purchase a new computer with this specific operating system...

6. Our product is the only one of its kind...

7. Our services are supplier-neutral...

8. Subscription-based licensing is less costly than perpetual licensing...

Remember, "Agree" if you would accept or believe the clause or statement, "Disagree" if you would not accept or believe. Once you are finished, I'll explain how we can help you create a more cost-effective technology environment.

Here's the bottom line:

If you answered "Agree" to ANY of these items, you are an easy target for over-priced & under-delivered technology goods and services. You are a victim of the "this is the way it's done" mindset. You'll pay whatever the supplier asks and accept whatever product they plop down on your desktop. (Scary, isn't it?)

If you answered "Disagree" on these items, there is hope for you... You are on the road to getting actual value for your tech dollars. Consider:

1. This software contract is not negotiable...

   1. Bull. While the suppliers want you to THINK this, it isn't true. If it is, you need to find new suppliers.

2. The hardware agreement is not negotiable...

   1. Wanna bet? Re-read the item above.

3. We reserve the right to change the agreement at will and without notice...

   1. No... You do not and you WILL not.

4. This product is sold "as is"...

   1. Wrong. I purchased this product to perform specific tasks. If you cannot back the product - in writing - to do those tasks, don't come here trying to sell it.

5. You can only purchase a new computer with this specific operating system...

   1. No. That's you're agreement with the software publisher. You make money on every one of THEIR operating systems you force consumers to accept. There are alternatives. I want to know what they are & I do NOT expect to pay more to select an alternative.

6. Our product is the only one of its kind...

   1. Not in THIS century. There are plenty of alternatives that fit my needs & I'm perfectly willing to move to one of your competitors.

7. Our services are supplier-neutral...

   1. If a supplier taking money from a specific systems or software company, or if the supplier is investing money in becoming "certified" through a specific company then I'd be pretty ignorant to believe you weren't going to recommend (push?) that company's goods or services.

8. Subscription-based licensing is less costly than perpetual licensing...

   1. Let's see... A perpetual license means I pay one fee and use the product until "I" chose to change or I move to a subscription agreement, paying you a repetitive yearly fee to use whatever product "YOU" are pushing at the time. If version 1 works for me, I shouldn't have to move up to versions 2, 3, 4, and 5 just because you quit supporting them. (I rarely used your support anyway.)

These are VERY simple responses to these very common statements and/or licensing clauses. (Don't believe me? Take time out to read three licenses for products on your computers. Many of these clauses are going to be right there in your hand & you're already legally bound to them.)

Businesses are constantly spending too much for too little in terms of software assets, hardware assets & support / maintenance agreements. Not only do we spend too much, we have also been carefully trained to accept whatever products or services are slapped with a "cutting edge" label. If you want to get serious value for your technology dollar, you need to be part of The Network and The Institute.

Our core purpose is to teach you - YOU - how to change your relationships with technology suppliers. If you do not get proactive on this you'll continue to be a helpless victim of tech sharp practices in licensing & related agreements. Get what you expect & only pay for what's delivered.

Reducing Costs With Software As a Service? (SaaS) Just Like Your Cell Phone Bills!

I know that I've referred to Software as a Service (SaaS) as the prelude to a wide variety of onerous licensing tactics--and substantial hikes in technology spending. The most serious problem - and one we should ALL fear - is that a great deal of money is being spent to convince us that SaaS will reduce IT costs.

Answer me this: Since when does ANY software industry player want us to reduce spending on their products? Remember how well Software Advantage worked out (For Microsoft--not for the consumer)?

If you think software costs are out of line with value, here's another concept to consider:

• You're aware of how you get to pay for every minute; every message; and, seemingly, every breath you take on your cell phone, right?
• You know how the cell companies do business, right? How about AT&T long distance?
  
• Now, picture the same model in terms of software...

1. First they arrange to completely OWN the access - you just pay to use it;
2. They initially charge a flat rate per user - Not much, but then again, we want EVERYONE completely addicted as quickly as possible;
3. After you are hooked, and the costs to back out are prohibitive, they begin "adjusting" the rates to include per minute charges; per user charges; bandwidth surcharges; named user accounts; and so on...
   
4. Then they move to additional service fees (as in the banking industry); access fees; data recovery fees; data storage fees; billing fees; license surcharges; Billy's vacation fees; and so on...
   

Eventually, your software bill will read like a cell phone bill on a bus load of invoicing steroids - along with a "screw with us and we cancel your access" attitude. How quickly would your business drown without access to your computer systems? THAT is the question you need to ask - and develop honest answers for - prior to falling into the SaaS quagmire.

Oh...wait! Mr. (or) Ms. Software Billionaire says, "WE would never do that to our customer base." Right...

Business Technologies: You are Paying WAY Too Much!

Chad Walter recently asked a very good question that taps into the knowledge core of technology asset management. (It's here: Blogger)

"Does your business drive technology or does technology drive your business."

Great question, and it hides an enormous amount of detail that could easily translate into a unique value transformation of your enterprise technology environment. Here are my comments about how your company winds up spending the bucks on WAY more technology than you need.

The really serious key in this comment is that, with very low-tech, and highly cost-effective, technology asset management processes and procedures, you could reverse the costly trend of reactive buying and put business needs up front where they belong.

After nearly ten years of teaching technology asset management, tech portfolio management, negotiations, project management, and related programs to business professionals from around the globe, I would suggest that - for the average enterprise - technology is not merely driving the business but is also driving their "potential."

Want to reduce your company tech spending and build business value through tech?

Stop buying what you WANT and start buying what you NEED!

Altogether too frequently, an enterprise will contact me with operational problems brought about, not by IT as such, but by a slavish focus on "techno-best" at all costs. As a result, we see too many companies with very costly IT environments that have significantly outpaced user needs or abilities in their capacity.

It's called feature bloat and it means you are NOT in control--the supplier is.

When the users do not use - need - or want - a given level of functionality, then the enterprise has invested money in the wrong technology for its business model. Instead, you are conforming to the business needs of a supplier that convinced someone within your purchase/acquisition process that they MUST HAVE the new product or service.

As a direct result you will find yourself...

• Over-spending by a factor of as much as double,

• Under-utilization by factors of 10X and more,

• Constantly in reactive acquisition mode, rather than strategic acquisition mode,

• Paying enormous sums for unnecessary complexity that pushes the limits of your tech support, hardware, and systems compatibility,

• Modifying hardware as well as software simply because supplier "X" changed their product to "latest toy" stature,

Sometimes these problems are caused by C-suite personnel who "must have" the latest and greatest at all costs. Frequently, I meet with tech personnel who show me piles of new technology that far exceed the user abilities of the personnel. Sometimes these products were purchased for no more valid reason than "..an executive on the airline was using one and we should have it, too."

Or, the problem can be caused by techies who are under the same impression. Don't forget that techies, God love their strangely assembled brains, have invested a great deal of their time and personal efforts in learning a specific range of technologies. When the provider of that particular technology changes to a new product, sometimes the techs have no choice but to upgrade--or they could lose their certifications.

Now... There's a couple great justifications for business technology acquisitions.

The most common source of problems is a combination of many diverse factors and, in every client environment, we spend focused time sorting these out to find the root causes. But, there is another issue we should consider: As long as the enterprise is channeled into internal technology life cycle management decisions based on external pressures by suppliers, there will be - can be - no resolution to unnecessary IT spending.

In other words: Just because the supplier upgrades doesn't mean your business will benefit from the changes.

Pack all this together and couple it with the fact that the majority of companies simply does not have their own long-term & enterprise-loyal technical team. When all of these issues align the chances are pretty solid that you'll wind up with technology driving the enterprise potential for operational excellence instead of business strategies driving the tech environment.

Somehow, tech BECOMES the business because the business is too focused on keeping up with tech.

Here's How You Can Cut Costs on Software or on Hardware Support / Maintenance

Why are auto-renewal licenses and support / maintenance agreements an incredibly costly problem?

A majority of very typical enterprises:

• Have no trained individual responsible for closely monitoring auto-renewal agreements.
  
• Simply have no idea which auto-renewal licenses and agreements they have present in their technology environments.
  
• Do not know when the auto-renewal takes place.
• Do not know the process for canceling the auto-renewal.
• Have no process for determining if they should cancel the agreement.
• Try to purchase and implement costly and overly complex supplier-specific solutions or try to implement just-as-costly generic global standards.
  
• Have no executive support within the enterprise to extend the responsibility and authority to take action to reduce costs in a strategic manner.
• Honestly believe that they can purchase a silver-bullet solution that will resolve all their problems in one fell swoop.
  

Real World - Most auto-renewal agreements are crafted in such a manner that, if you do not cancel precisely in accordance with the terms and conditions, you will still have to pay for another year. (Yes, even if you tried to cancel.)

How do you prevent your company from being hammered by auto-renewal software or hardware support and maintenance agreement sharp practices?

• If this initiative isn't important to executive management, it isn't going to happen. If you are an owner / board member / executive manager, it is absolutely vital for you to get behind this individual asset management process. The savings can be enormous--with little or no negative impact on operations.
• Ensure that one of your people becomes trained in the methods and processes for closely monitoring the terms and conditions of licenses and agreements. No, you do not necessarily need a lawyer for this--an advanced clerical worker or paralegal could manage these on a day to day basis. (We do not teach law or profess to provide legal advice. We do, however, provide basic common sense methods for understanding the day to day requirements of technology agreements.)
• Ensure that your designated asset manager has the infrastructure present to gain access to the operational information required to effectively manage these materials.
• Ensure that all auto-renewal dates are clearly documented as well as the lead time for notification.
• Ensure that a VERY clear documentation process is in place to identify the precise dates and processes required to cancel an auto-renewal.
• Ensure that the asset manager has a credible and measurable process for evaluating the need to continue or cancel a given agreement.
• Ensure that you complete the simple, cost effective, and common sense ground work prior to considering new software, standards, or teams of consultant experts.
• Oh... And there IS no silver bullet solution. You're just gonna have to apply brain power.
  

There's more but you should get the idea. Remember, you have a choice in implementing technology asset management initiatives.

• You can choose to use the expensive-to-purchase and expensive-to-implement supplier-hype solutions involving costly international standards.

OR

• You can use a plain old normal, common sense, and a cost effective phased approach that makes sense for your unique environment. Once this ground work is in place, you can move on to more complex options.
  

I suggest you use option #2.